Subject: Updated RFC 1434 FSMs (NETBIOS)

From: "Steve Klein" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 27 Jan 94 14:36:37 EST

Oops.  Forgot to send out the updated FSMs for the NETBIOS section of
the RFC.  Again, the change for the 6611 implementation update is
indicated with a revision code of '1' in column one.

Any comments (good, bad, or indifferent) on the proposal for the
seperation of the topology and session setup?

Steve

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

 NETBIOS Datagrams
 -----------------

   NETBIOS DLC Frames:

   +---------------------------+------------------+--------------------+
   |          Event            |     Action(s)    |      Comment       |
   +---------------------------+------------------+--------------------+
   | DLC_DGRM for NETBIOS      | Send NETBIOS_ANQ | Transmitted to all |
   |  group address:           |                  |   remote DLS       |
   |   NB_Add_Name_Query       |                  |                    |
   +---------------------------+------------------+--------------------+
   | DLC_DGRM for a specific   | Send NETBIOS_ANR | Transmitted to     |
   |  address:                 |                  |   specific DLS     |
   |   NB_Add_Name_Response    |                  |                    |
   +---------------------------+------------------+--------------------+
   | DLC_DGRM for a specific   | Send DATAFRAME   | Transmitted to all |
   |  address:                 |                  |   remote DLS       |
   |   NB_Status_Response      |                  |                    |
   +---------------------------+------------------+--------------------+
   | DLC_DGRM for NETBIOS      | Send DATAFRAME   | Transmitted to all |
   |  group address:           |                  |   remote DLS       |
   |   NB_Name_in_Conflict     |                  |                    |
   |   NB_Add_Group_Name_Query |                  |                    |
   |   NB_Datagram,            |                  |                    |
   |   NB_Datagram_Broadcast   |                  |                    |
   |   NB_Status_Query         |                  |                    |
   |   NB_Terminate_Trace      |                  |                    |
   +---------------------------+------------------+--------------------+

   +---------------+-------------------------+-------------------------+
   |     Event     |        Action(s)        |         Comment         |
   +---------------+-------------------------+-------------------------+
   | NETBIOS_ANQ   | DLC_DGRM:               | Routed STE              |
   |               |    NB_Add_Name_Query    | (NETBIOS Group Address) |
   +---------------+-------------------------+-------------------------+
1  | NETBIOS_ANR   | DLC_DGRM:               | Routed STE              |
   |               |    NB_Add_Name_Response | (Specific MAC Address)  |
   +---------------+-------------------------+-------------------------+
   | NETBIOS_NQ    | DLC_DGRM:               | Routed STE              |
   |               |    NB_Name_Query        | (NETBIOS Group Address) |
   +---------------+-------------------------+-------------------------+
   | NETBIOS_NR    | DLC_DGRM:               | Routed SRF              |
   |               |    NB_Name_Recognized   | (Specific MAC Address)  |
   +---------------+-------------------------+-------------------------+
   | DATAFRAME     | DLC_DGRM                | Routed STE              |
   |               |                         | (If NB_Status_Response: |
   |               |                         |   Specific MAC Address  |
   |               |                         |  Else:                  |
   |               |                         |   NETBIOS Group Address)|
   +---------------+-------------------------+-------------------------+

---

From: Gilbert Moineau <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 10 Feb 94 12:10:00 PST

There is no Timeout defined anywhere in the 1434 FSM.  Do you assume that 
the end stations will provide these timeout functions (If an expected reply 
never comes back from the remote switch for example).